Faculty and Staff
This collection collates faculty and staff collections alphabetically by surname.
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Digital preservation
- All Subjects: Systematic reviews (medical research)
An invited keynote presentation about electronic records advocacy offered at the New England Archivists Fall Meeting, October 12, 2007 at Storrs, Connecticut.
Video recording of the NHPRC Electronic Records Fellowship Symposium keynote address, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, November 18, 2005.
Brief overview presentation created for the Historical Department of the Salt River Project, Phoenix, Arizona, April 2012.
An invited presentation on digital preservation skills for archival professionals offered at the Persistence of Memory conference hosted by the New England Document Conservation Center at Tucson, Arizona on December 5, 2006.
Presentation slides from a workshop on Electronic Records Management and Archives offered to archivists, records managers and technology professionals of the University of California system at Oakland, California from October 26-27, 2006.
Digital technology has enabled us to record and share our memories and histories faster and in greater numbers than previously imagined. However digital files rely on hardware, software, and descriptive information to be used. As formats change and equipment to read them goes out of use we are all challenged to connect our present to our future. How long do you want your digital files to last? Decades or even a few years from now will you still be able to access and enjoy those pictures, documents and other digital items you create today?
Libraries, museums and archives spend countless hours and resources preserving physical items from the past and present, but may be forfeiting the longevity of our digital work and connecting to future generations through unintended neglect. Using practical examples and employing best practices of research institutions, participants will learn important first steps to digital preservation including the importance of metadata to personal history, recommended file formats, and approaches they can immediately use to ensure the work they create today will still be enjoyed tomorrow. Help yourself, your organization, and your patrons continue to connect their digital heritage to the generations yet to come.
Originally developed for medicine and related fields in support of evidence-based practice, systematic reviews (SRs) are now published in other fields. We investigated non-health sciences disciplines that are publishing systematic reviews.
Research questions:
“What disciplines outside the health sciences are adopting systematic reviews?”
“How do systematic reviews outside the health sciences compare with health sciences systematic reviews?”
Methods:
We conducted a search in the Scopus database for articles with the phrase “systematic review*” in the title or abstract. We limited our results to review articles, and eliminated health science focused articles using the Scopus Subject area categories. Articles were examined by reviewers to determine if they a) were classified as SRs by the authors b) exhibited accepted characteristics of systematic reviews, such as a comprehensive search, adherence to a predetermined protocol, and assessment of bias and quality, and c) addressed a non-health sciences topic. We eliminated articles based on 1) title, 2) abstract, and finally 3) the full text of each article. We reconciled differences for articles on which there was not initial consensus, and grouped remaining articles according to Scopus subject areas.
Discussion:
We found a significant number of systematic reviews outside the health science disciplines, particularly in the physical and social sciences. We compared similarities as well as differences to the protocols and processes used in health sciences systematic reviews. These findings have implications for librarians both inside and outside the health sciences arena who participate in systematic review projects.
Background & Objective:
Over the past several decades, systematic reviews have become a major part of the biomedical research literature landscape. While systematic reviews were originally developed for medicine and its related fields, they are now published in other disciplines. Our initial goal was to broadly investigate and describe the non-health sciences subject areas and disciplines that are publishing systematic reviews. Specifically, our research questions were,“What disciplines outside of the health sciences are adopting systematic reviews as a research method?” and “What implications may this have for health sciences librarianship?” Based on our initial findings, we will propose avenues for future research.
Methods & Discussion:
We conducted a search in the Scopus database to serve as a representative sample of the research literature. We searched for the phrase “systematic review*” in the article title or abstract, and limited the results to review articles from journals. We filtered out articles published in health sciences disciplines using the Scopus subject categories, and examined the articles that remained. The resulting set of titles was screened by two independent reviewers in a stepwise fashion. First we read the titles, then the abstracts, then the full text of remaining articles to determine if each was a systematic review and addressed a topic outside of the health sciences. We reconciled any differences for citations on which there was not initial consensus between reviewers. Lastly, we examined each remaining article to categorize its subject area or discipline. Our initial search included a number of systematic reviews outside the health science disciplines, and will yield data that has implications for librarians in the health sciences and in disciplines outside the health sciences field.